"Greg KH" <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 11:54:59AM +0100, Andreas Hindborg wrote: >> This patch includes changes required for Rust kernel modules to utilize >> module parameters. This code implements read only support for integer >> types without `sysfs` support. > > I know you want to keep this simple for now, but will you have to go and > touch all users of this when you do add the sysfs support later? sysfs > wants the mode of the file to be set here, so how do you think of that > happening? We would add the required fields to the `module!` macro as optional fields. No need to touch everyone. Leaving out the sysfs file permission field would cause the parameter to not show up in sysfs. > And don't you need that for your null block driver? Yes I need it eventually. > Also, what about all the other "types" of module parameters that are > currently able to be done, like call-back, hardware control, and unsafe? > Are we just not going to do that for rust code (no objection from me, > just wanting to be sure.) Someone told me "no dead code", so I would defer those features to when we have a user. We have blueprints for strings and arrays based on Adams earlier work. I don't imagine any rust code relying on hw param and the use in the kernel seems to be very limited. Not sure about cb params. While it might be nice for the user to be able to pass a callback to decode/sanitize , the same effect could be achieved by putting the logic elsewhere. I don't have an idea of how to implement this in Rust at the moment, but I am sure we can come up with a solution if we need to. Best regards, Andreas Hindborg
